Another Big COVID Lie bites the dust

Since the COVID-19 debacle began, I have had many conversations with people who realised at some point that something just wasn’t right about the unprecedented global response to a respiratory virus which is about as dangerous as a bad seasonal flu. At some point, these conversations always turn to the question, “Why can’t other people see that politicians, bureaucrats and the media are flat-out lying about just about everything, when it’s so obvious to me?”

The answer to that perplexing question, strangely enough, was formulated by a failed landscape painter by the name of Adolf Hitler. In his manifesto Mein Kampf (which translates to ‘my struggle’), Hitler described the power of the Big Lie to gull the vast majority of people:

“In the Big Lie there is always a certain degree of credibility because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the very bottom of their hearts than consciously or voluntarily. And in the primitive simplicity of their minds, they more readily fall victims to the Big Lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters, but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never occur to them to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.

Even though the facts that prove this are clear, they will still doubt and waver, and will continue to think that there must be some other explanation. The grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has stuck—a fact that is known to all artful liars in this world, and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest of purposes.”

Mein Kampf

In other words, Hitler recognised that, paradoxically, it is easier to fool most people into believing an outrageous lie than a minor lie, and that even after clear evidence emerges to disprove the Big Lie, people continue to believe that it must be true – because surely no one would have the nerve to tell such a whopper in a public forum.

The entire COVID-19 psychological operation has been built on a litany of these Big Lies, one of which is that universal vaccination is our only way out of the pandemic. According to this Big Lie, if we can just push vaccination rates high enough, we’ll “stop the spread” of SARS-CoV-2, the virus associated with COVID-19, and life can go back to normal.

Australia, being a relatively late starter in the race to inject novel experimental drugs into the arms of its citizens, has had ample opportunity to examine the evidence for this particular claim, and to make policy shifts as appropriate.

Yet despite mounting indications that countries which rushed to jab their entire adult populations are not faring as well as was promised, our politicians and bureaucrats continue to regurgitate the Big Lie of the saviour vaccines as if nothing has changed.

But fortunately for humanity, increasing number of scientists and health professionals are publicly questioning that Big Lie.

And now, a researcher from the prestigious T.H. Chan School of Public Health at Harvard University has joined the swelling ranks of those departing from the establishment position.

Dr S. V. Subramanian (Professor of Population Health and Geography at Harvard University, and chair of Harvard’s Faculty Advisory Group for the Center for Geographic Analysis) collaborated with Akhil Kumar, a Canadian secondary school teacher with a penchant for data crunching, to conduct a detailed analysis of the relationship between vaccination rates and new COVID-19 cases across 68 countries, and across 2947 counties (local government areas) in the US.

The conclusions drawn from their analysis directly contradict the Big Lie.

Firstly, considering between-country comparisons,

“At the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days (Fig. 1). In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.”

Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States

Yes, you read that correctly. Countries which have jabbed more of their populations do not have lower rates of COVID-19 infection, and if anything, tend to have higher rates than countries with fewer jabbed inhabitants.

Subramanian and Kumar go on to ram the point home with some illustrative examples:

“Notably, Israel with over 60% of their population fully vaccinated had the highest COVID-19 cases per 1 million people in the last 7 days. The lack of a meaningful association between percentage population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases is further exemplified, for instance, by comparison of Iceland and Portugal. Both countries have over 75% of their population fully vaccinated and have more COVID-19 cases per 1 million people than countries such as Vietnam and South Africa that have around 10% of their population fully vaccinated.”

Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States

If you prefer your data in visual form, here it is:

figure1

Secondly, at a within-country level, the researchers sifted through data from 2947 US counties, and found no supportive evidence for the Big Lie that achieving higher vaccination rates is the key to defeating COVID-19:

“Of the top 5 counties that have the highest percentage of population fully vaccinated (99.9–84.3%), the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) identifies 4 of them as “High” Transmission counties. Chattahoochee (Georgia), McKinley (New Mexico), and Arecibo (Puerto Rico) counties have above 90% of their population fully vaccinated with all three being classified as “High” transmission. Conversely, of the 57 counties that have been classified as “low” transmission counties by the CDC, 26.3% have percentage of population fully vaccinated below 20%.”

Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States

When it comes to drawing conclusions from their data analysis, Subramanian and Kumar don’t mince their words. It’s worth quoting them at length:

“The sole reliance on vaccination as a primary strategy to mitigate COVID-19 and its adverse consequences needs to be re-examined, especially considering the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant and the likelihood of future variants. Other pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions may need to be put in place alongside increasing vaccination rates. Such course correction, especially with regards to the policy narrative, becomes paramount with emerging scientific evidence on real world effectiveness of the vaccines.
For instance, in a report released from the Ministry of Health in Israel, the effectiveness of 2 doses of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine against preventing COVID-19 infection was reported to be 39% [6], substantially lower than the trial efficacy of 96% [7]. It is also emerging that immunity derived from the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine may not be as strong as immunity acquired through recovery from the COVID-19 virus [8]. A substantial decline in immunity from mRNA vaccines 6-months post immunization has also been reported [9]. Even though vaccinations offers protection to individuals against severe hospitalization and death, the CDC reported an increase from 0.01 to 9% and 0 to 15.1% (between January to May 2021) in the rates of hospitalizations and deaths, respectively, amongst the fully vaccinated [10].”

Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States

If we lived in a world in which policy decisions that affected billions of people were based on scientific evidence and rationality, this study would prompt a dramatic change in the approach to managing COVID-19.

However, we do not live in such a world. Instead, we are careening into an eerily similar mass psychosis to that which took hold of Germany and Austria in the 1930s.

In his psychological profile of Adolf Hitler, Walter C. Langer described the salient characteristics of the man who managed to persuade tens of millions of German-speaking people that all the economic, social and political woes that beset them were due to “inferior elements” in the population, including Jews, Gypsies, and the “physically degenerate or mentally ill”:

“His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.”

Adolf Hitler: Psychological Analysis of Hitler’s Life & Legend

Next time you hear a politician or health bureaucrat heaping scorn and derision onto so-called “antivaxxers” (a pejorative used only by pharma shills and people who are incapable of engaging in rational discussion of evidence); blaming those who refuse to comply with nonsensical biosecurity theatre for the ongoing restrictions that they themselves have unjustifiably imposed on their citizens; denying that any cheap, safe and effective treatments for COVID-19 exist in the face of clear evidence that they do; and reciting one Big COVID Lie after another, remember Langer’s words. Hitler was most assuredly not a one-off.

There is already more than ample evidence to disprove every single one of the Big COVID Lies. Only two questions remain: How long will those who have been suckered by these lies “still doubt and waver, and… continue to think that there must be some other explanation” for the industrial-scale fraud that has been perpetrated on them by the Big Liars who have abused their naive trust for so long? And will enough of them wake up to the deception in time to halt the accelerating slide into global capitalist dystopia?

The Big Lies propounded by Hitler cost between 70 and 85 million lives, and left scars on human souls that have echoed down through multiple generations. Can we learn from history in time to save ourselves from an even greater catastrophe?

Watch this space.

Are you confused by the scientific claims and counter-claims that you encounter through popular and social media? Would you like to learn how to read scientific research, assess its biases, and understand how it fits within the body of scientific literature? My EmpowerEd membership program is custom-made for you! Activate your free 1-month trial today!

Leave your comments below:

2 Comments

  • DaveQB

    Reply Reply 03/01/2022

    [Edit: I started this reply just after you posted but hadn’t finished up until now]

    Hi Robyn,

    Thanks for your work looking into this complicated subjects for us.

    The first point I wanted to discuss was the statement “about as dangerous as a bad seasonal flu.” and the linked to study. In my mind , that phrase misrepresents the study. The main detractor of this meta analysis is that it was conducted in Sept 2020, pre-delta variant. The study concludes “The infection fatality rate of COVID-19 can vary substantially across different locations and this may reflect differences in population age structure and case-mix of infected and deceased patients and other factors. The inferred infection fatality rates tended to be much lower than estimates made earlier in the pandemic.” Which we know to be true with most countries taking steps to attempt to save their people with health laws and many people taking on the medical advice (such as social distancing and working from home). This was shown with a big impact in Influenza, going down from 149,832 to 7,029 due to COVID restrictions in Australia. (https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.47.2001847#abstract_content). Another side effect of restrictions and health orders, we’ve seen is in the Earth healing from less people moving about, manufacturing slowing down etc.

    Here is a good video to show the statistical break down of influenza and COVID in the UK recently https://www.ft.com/video/0cd6f9f9-664e-40f9-bad4-dde59d7c746c

    I’d like you’d to elaborate more on this comment “Yet despite mounting indications that countries which rushed to jab their entire adult populations are not faring as well as was promised…” This comment to contradicting what I am seeing.

    The main study your article is referring to (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00808-7), reads to me that cases have gone up where vaccination rates have gone up. But we need to agree upon a definition for the term “cases”. Cases are indeed expected to go up in areas where vaccination is high. Restrictions (social distancing, masks etc) are eased due to (high) vaccination thresholds being met. This leads to more infections. However, hospitalisation rates remain the same or decline (depending where their starting point was) most likely due to of the high vaccination rate. Some believe we’ll all get COVID19 at some point. But you want COVID19 to be a mild cold with mild symptoms, or better, asymptomatic, rather than put you in hospital. Another way of looking at it is, without some sort of vaccination, easing of restrictions would result our hospital system being put under so much pressure, it wouldn’t be able to cope. So saying high vaccinations rates leads to higher cases sounds like a correlation but not a causation. Much like you can argue that ambulances should be banned as where ever they are, there’s usually someone injured or unwell 😃

    Another quote from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00808-7:

    “For instance, in a report released from the Ministry of Health in Israel, the effectiveness of 2 doses of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine against preventing COVID-19 infection was reported to be 39%” – This is for COVID-19 cases. If you follow the source of this figure (https://www.gov.il/BlobFolder/reports/vaccine-efficacy-safety-follow-up-committee/he/files_publications_corona_two-dose-vaccination-data.pdf) you’ll see it says Israel’s numbers as 88% Vaccine Effectiveness (VE)against hospitalisation and 91.4% VE against Severe COVID-19. That’s bloody awesome in my book. So it feels like your referenced report from this study is leading the reader astray slightly in the way it is representing the results. I think the reader needs to have clear thoughts on the difference from catching SARS-CoV-2 versus having severe symptoms and ending up in hospital or worse, ICU.

    Tangential findings worth noting, in my looking around, a study of real world conditions of 2 dose BNT162b2 published in May 2021 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33999127/), you’ll see high vaccine efficacy. As the paper concludes “The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine is comparable to the one reported in the phase III clinical trial.”

    Thanks Robyn and Happy New Year!

    Ref:
    https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.47.2001847#abstract_content
    https://www.nsw.gov.au/covid-19/stay-safe/data-and-statistics
    https://covidlive.com.au/nsw
    https://www.ft.com/video/0cd6f9f9-664e-40f9-bad4-dde59d7c746c
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33999127/

    • Robyn Chuter

      Reply Reply 03/01/2022

      Hi David. Taking your comments point by point:
      1. “The main detractor of this meta analysis is that it was conducted in Sept 2020, pre-delta variant.”
      Since the Delta variant has a substantially lower case fatality rate than the previously-dominant Alpha variant (see Table 4 at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1001354/Variants_of_Concern_VOC_Technical_Briefing_17.pdf; CFR for Delta was 0.3% vs 1.9% for Alpha), the IFR of SARS-CoV-2 is now almost certainly lower than it was in Sept 2020.
      2. “most countries taking steps to attempt to save their people with health laws and many people taking on the medical advice (such as social distancing and working from home).”
      There is not a single mote of evidence that social distancing or any other supposed COVID-19 containment policies had any effect on viral spread, hospitalisation or death, and a mountain of evidence to the contrary. See https://brownstone.org/articles/more-than-400-studies-on-the-failure-of-compulsory-covid-interventions/ for a thorough listing.
      3. “This was shown with a big impact in Influenza, going down from 149,832 to 7,029 due to COVID restrictions in Australia.”
      The US FDA has withdrawn the SARS-CoV-2 PCR test because it cannot distinguish between SARS-CoV-2 and influenza. So the fact that influenza notifications went down is mostly attributable to the conflation of flu cases with COVID cases, although viral competition may have played a role i.e. SARS-CoV-2 outcompeting influenza virus in its ecological niche.
      More to the point, can you not see that it’s patently ridiculous to assert that the same set of measures that failed to arrest the spread of SARS-CoV-2 somehow magically worked to contain influenza, despite a) the two viruses having the same transmission dynamics and b) all previous evidence showing that masks, social distancing etc have no impact on influenza? It’s time to engage your logic!!!!
      4. “Another side effect of restrictions and health orders, we’ve seen is in the Earth healing from less people moving about, manufacturing slowing down etc.”
      This is arrant nonsense. Although personally I don’t think that atmospheric CO2 levels are as significant as the current climate narrative asserts, it’s a simple fact that atmospheric CO2 levels reached their highest ever concentration in 2020 and rose further in 2021, largely because China accounts for a disproportionate amount of CO2 emissions as most of the rest of the world has offshored its heavy manufacturing to China. On top of that, the waterways are now full of face masks that leach toxic plastics in the water, polluting the entire marine food chain.
      5. “But we need to agree upon a definition for the term “cases”.”
      Yes, we most certainly do, and if the pre-COVID definition of a “case” was still in use – i.e. a person is ill with symptoms of a respiratory infection, it would be abundantly clear that we don’t have a pandemic; we just have a new virus that causes respiratory tract infections at about the expected rate.
      6. “Cases are indeed expected to go up in areas where vaccination is high. Restrictions (social distancing, masks etc) are eased due to (high) vaccination thresholds being met. This leads to more infections. However, hospitalisation rates remain the same or decline (depending where their starting point was) most likely due to of the high vaccination rate.”
      This is an empty assertion not backed by facts. SARS-CoV-2 spreads most rapidly in indoor settings, especially household settings, so locking people in their homes causes greater transmission and a greater risk of severe illness due to higher viral load.
      7. “Some believe we’ll all get COVID19 at some point. But you want COVID19 to be a mild cold with mild symptoms, or better, asymptomatic, rather than put you in hospital.”
      I hate to break the news to you, but it already IS a mild cold with mild and/or no symptoms for the vast majority of people, and was acknowledged to be so by the WHO from the beginning of the pandemic. The emergence of the Omicron variant has probably completed the transition to endemicity.
      8. “without some sort of vaccination, easing of restrictions would result our hospital system being put under so much pressure, it wouldn’t be able to cope.”
      Quite frankly, this is complete bollocks. There has never been an unsustainable level of pressure on hospital systems (although a handful of hospitals became temporarily overwhelmed early in the pandemic because they were admitting many people who weren’t actually ill and using terrible treatment protocols which resulted in rapid clinical deterioration) and there sure as hell isn’t now. The hospitalisation usage data at https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization show that there is no bed shortage even in US states with low jab rates e.g. Idaho is at 46% double jabbed (see https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization) and has 29% of its hospital beds free, with less than 8% being used for COVID patients (see https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization) – and remember, people who are admitted for treatment of other conditions but who test positive after admission are counted as “COVID patients”). It took me 2 minutes to find this information. You clearly have access to the Internet – start using it.
      9. On vaccine effectiveness, I’ve already covered the issue of plumetting vaccine effectiveness in https://empowertotalhealth.com.au/the-covid-19-vaccine-treadmill/, so read that as I’m not going to regurgitate it here.
      The crucial metric is all-cause morbidity and mortality, and it’s abundantly clear that the COVID-19 jabs are a total failure in this metric – see https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/these-vaccines-are-ineffective-a, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC8437699/, https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/11SqfJ5m_rvBfssP_wtgGEdgpUue6KH0WXxrfpNADp1c/edit#slide=id.g1019c138ad3_0_107, https://www.skirsch.com/covid/Deaths.pdf and https://jessicar.substack.com/p/covid-19-is-not-the-problem, just for starters.
      Regards
      Robyn

Leave A Response

* Denotes Required Field